SNP depute leader Keith Brown has been cleared of breaking Holyrood’s code of conduct in a lobbying row relating to traffic lights on the “Bridge over the Atlantic”.
Brown, MSP for Clackmannanshire and Dunblane, wrote to Argyll and Bute Council’s chief executive Pippa Milne on behalf of a constituency who claimed to witness a collision on the B844 Easdale Road.
The Herald reports that the constituent called for the 60mph limit to be reduced to 40mph and for traffic lights to be installed at Clachan Bridge.
Brown then wrote to the local authority chief asking if Milne could "consider my constituent's comments on this matter".
The council later secured funding from the Scottish Government’s Road Safety Infrastructure Fund to pay for the works, the newspaper reports, with costs estimated at £35,000.
However, residents in Seil said they only learned of the lights when contractors began the work, and have opposed them being installed at the 233-year-old bridge, which is a Category A structure.
After Brown’s letter was revealed through Freedom of Information (FOI), Ewan Kennedy, a retired lawyer, wrote to the Presiding Officer to say that Brown had breached Section 8.4 of the Parliament’s Code of Conduct.
This states that the MSP "must not deal with a constituency case or constituency issue outwith their constituency/region unless by prior agreement".
Kennedy told Presiding Officer Kenneth Gibson: “Despite a warning from their Roads Department about the sensitivity of the matter, the need for consultations and consents to be obtained, and the installation actually to be designed, the Council immediately went ahead with the building work, which has since stopped.”
"The local community has been strongly against the project, and extremely vocal in its responses," he wrote.
Kennedy said the "furore [was] a clear demonstration of the wisdom behind paragraph 4 of Section 8 of the Code of Conduct, of which Mr Brown's intervention appears to be a clear breach".
In his response, Gibson said the provision can be “open to different interpretations”, and that an MSP can pursue issues on a constituent's behalf “regardless of where the events or circumstances giving rise to those issues occurred”.
"Having considered the wording of the code and the circumstances of this case, I am not satisfied that this is an evident breach as the relevant provision is capable of more than one reasonable interpretation,” Gibson said.
Brown told The Herald he was “pleased” the complaint had been dismissed.
"My responsibility as an MSP is to represent the people who elect me,” he said.
“The issues that affect my constituents do not stop at the Clackmannanshire and Dunblane constituency boundary, and neither should my willingness to help them.
"Since the Scottish Parliament was established, it has been the accepted practice that MSPs represent their own constituents, regardless of where the events giving rise to their concerns occurred.
"Every day, MSPs across Scotland help constituents with matters involving hospitals, councils, transport providers, planning issues and public bodies beyond their own constituency boundaries.
"The Code of Conduct is clear that MSPs have a duty to represent their own constituents while not taking over the constituency work of another member.
"Those principles are entirely compatible.
"In this case, I was contacted by one of my own constituents and acted on their behalf. Had they approached the local MSP instead, they would rightly have been directed back to me, as is the established practice.
"I welcome the clarity this decision provides and remain committed to representing my constituents wherever an issue affects their lives.”
